@missnc77 YES! I was saying to MH that it feels like Bernie is talking about Monopoly money. He has such lofty ideas about radical social change, but it is in a fantasy world where there is no deficit and the streets are paved in free money. I tend to be more of a realist and get so frustrated because he talks like someone who is out of touch with the reality of the current American political and economic climate. I want to agree with him, I want to FEEL THE BERN, but I guess I am too jaded and too firmly planted on the ground to let my head get that far up in the clouds.
I don't really enjoy going out to the movies. I would much rather cuddle up on my couch at home and watch one. It is cheaper and I don't have to put pants on.
This is going to sound so crazy...but after all those movie theater shootings, I can't go to a movie without glancing sort of suspiciously at everyone that comes in. It's on my mind way too much when I'm trying to enjoy a movie.
QBF
Honestly, I won't ever be able to go to an opening night movie after Aurora.
My tax bracket would also go up to 30%, but it is just 2.5% more than I pay now. The one I looked at was to cover healthcare, which I figured would make my $650+ healthcare month a cost go away and it wouldn't be too much of a burden.
I also know that someone that extreme wouldn't get all his ideals passed so I think it would be a happy medium when they would agree.
You're okay that your taxes will go up in hopes your healthcare costs would go away, but you're also banking on the fact his ideals probably won't get passed and you'll get a watered down version of a campaign promise? Which most likely means, you'll still be paying for your healthcare. What's the point then? Since when has Congress ever agreed on a happy medium?
Also, 2.5% is a lot. Look at it this way using a combined income of $140K as an example.
Difference from 25% to 30% equates to $583 per month. From 28% to 30% = $233 per month.
So no, 2.5% doesn't sound like a lot, but are you really willing to give up another $233 per month from your household income on the chance that Congress will agree on a happy medium? Maybe because I've worked in politics I've become more jaded, but I'd rather just keep my $233.
Plus if you've read the analysis on Bernie's tax plan and how cutting healthcare costs for employers while added other taxes in, you'd see that it may not be all sunshine and roses. Employers won't be saving money from cutting healthcare if they then have to pay other taxes. So where does that money come from? It's like a rabbit hole.
I'm confused - has any candidate who has been elected able to get everything he campaigned for through? If you can tell me where that happens, please do because then of course my thinking would be wrong. However, I feel like everything in politics is about compromise.
Also - I talked about one point in what you said. There are definitely other issues that are important outside of taxes. And yes, I would be willing to give up $233 a month of income if it came with a person who I aligned with other things about their platform. I'm not saying it is not a lot of money, and I'm grateful that I have it, but I do believe there are good things done with tax money. (i.e. John Green who said he was willing to pay taxes for schools, even though he didn't have kids, because he didn't want to live in a country of stupid people.)
I'm in a camp where it is hard for me to understand those with school loans (why not go to a cheaper school? Why not work more during? Live at home? Etc.), but I definitely have seen the effects of outstanding medical bills on the working class. Can you find flaws in a universal healthcare? ABSOLUTELY. Can you find flaws in a current healthcare? ABSOLUTELY. I just do not want the working class to file for bankruptcy because they get life saving treatment. That is near and dear to me - every person has their sensitive issues. Would I be willing to risk a higher tax bracket in the hopes that it would benefit others? Yes.
So maybe to me it is more than just an extra $233 a month.
And as far as the rabbit hole, that hole has been going further and further with every single term. If there was someone who I felt like pushed important issues and was fiscally responsible, I would definitely check into them (i.e. why I said I was interested in Bloomberg above). However, I'm not seeing said candidate so I'm dealing with current options.
I'm in a camp where it is hard for me to understand those with school loans (why not go to a cheaper school? Why not work more during? Live at home? Etc.), but I definitely have seen the effects of outstanding medical bills on the working class. Can you find flaws in a universal healthcare? ABSOLUTELY. Can you find flaws in a current healthcare? ABSOLUTELY. I just do not want the working class to file for bankruptcy because they get life saving treatment. That is near and dear to me - every person has their sensitive issues. Would I be willing to risk a higher tax bracket in the hopes that it would benefit others? Yes.
The flaw with healthcare reform is that it never even got to the root of the issue - why is it so expensive in the first place? Instead of going for one approach of giving everyone free healthcare, I think we should start at the beginning. I immediately think of Martin Shkreli who artificially raised the price of Daraprim. All the sudden, people who could previously afford the drug couldn't. Healthcare reform as we know it wants to give money so it can be afforded. Another example I read recently in the NYTimes talked about fraudulent insurance billing by hospitals. Some hospitals will say there was another doctor that participated in the surgery and charge thousands of dollars extra. As the patient/insurance client, we don't really know what the insurance company is getting billed, and the insurance company can't verify who was in the room during a surgery. So again, the cost is more expensive than what it should have been. Or another piece on how bad military hospitals are outside of labor and delivery. It would be financially better and better for the health of the patients to close down some of these smaller, under performing base hospitals and allow the people using them to go to other hospitals in the community. Why don't they do this? Because the states cry about all the jobs that will be lost, etc. etc. so the populations these hospitals serve have to continue to get crappy healthcare.
I want healthcare reform to prevent these things from happening in the first place. But it's easier to throw money at a problem than to actually *reform* healthcare. I agree with you that I think if someone needs to go to the doctor or get a life saving treatment, they should have that access. Unfortunately, I don't think DC knows how to use my extra $233 a month to make that happen, so again, I'd rather keep it. Show me a real plan that makes logical sense and gets at the heart of the situation, and maybe I'll reconsider. "Free Healthcare!" doesn't get me there.
Another random yet mild thought from me - I strongly dislike the color purple. I can kind of deal with periwinkle or lavendar but straight up purple hurts my eyes.
I'm in a camp where it is hard for me to understand those with school loans (why not go to a cheaper school? Why not work more during? Live at home? Etc.), but I definitely have seen the effects of outstanding medical bills on the working class. Can you find flaws in a universal healthcare? ABSOLUTELY. Can you find flaws in a current healthcare? ABSOLUTELY. I just do not want the working class to file for bankruptcy because they get life saving treatment. That is near and dear to me - every person has their sensitive issues. Would I be willing to risk a higher tax bracket in the hopes that it would benefit others? Yes.
The flaw with healthcare reform is that it never even got to the root of the issue - why is it so expensive in the first place? Instead of going for one approach of giving everyone free healthcare, I think we should start at the beginning. I immediately think of Martin Shkreli who artificially raised the price of Daraprim. All the sudden, people who could previously afford the drug couldn't. Healthcare reform as we know it wants to give money so it can be afforded. Another example I read recently in the NYTimes talked about fraudulent insurance billing by hospitals. Some hospitals will say there was another doctor that participated in the surgery and charge thousands of dollars extra. As the patient/insurance client, we don't really know what the insurance company is getting billed, and the insurance company can't verify who was in the room during a surgery. So again, the cost is more expensive than what it should have been. Or another piece on how bad military hospitals are outside of labor and delivery. It would be financially better and better for the health of the patients to close down some of these smaller, under performing base hospitals and allow the people using them to go to other hospitals in the community. Why don't they do this? Because the states cry about all the jobs that will be lost, etc. etc. so the populations these hospitals serve have to continue to get crappy healthcare.
I want healthcare reform to prevent these things from happening in the first place. But it's easier to throw money at a problem than to actually *reform* healthcare. I agree with you that I think if someone needs to go to the doctor or get a life saving treatment, they should have that access. Unfortunately, I don't think DC knows how to use my extra $233 a month to make that happen, so again, I'd rather keep it. Show me a real plan that makes logical sense and gets at the heart of the situation, and maybe I'll reconsider. "Free Healthcare!" doesn't get me there.
I totally agree - start at the root. However, I do not see anyone proposing that - so in the meantime, we should limit healthcare to those that really need it because I insist on keeping $233 a month? That is too heavy of a burden for me to carry.
It sounds like you and I are on the same page in terms of wanting the overall problem fixed (heard a story where they charged a woman $14 for every pill paper cup they gave her when they administered meds - over $10k worth!!) - which candidate is going to be the one to do that?
Speaking of Martin Shkreli, did anyone else find the Congress hearing that he was summoned to hilarious and disturbing at the same time? It was like a massive face-off to see who could be the biggest a-hole--Shkreli or one of the congressmen.
Speaking of Martin Shkreli, did anyone else find the Congress hearing that he was summoned to hilarious and disturbing at the same time? It was like a massive face-off to see who could be the biggest a-hole--Shkreli or one of the congressmen.
I haven't looked at it, but now I'm very curious. I remember when the story first broke, and all the pictures of this CEO looked like he was trying to be in a rap video. He was an odd one, for sure.
Speaking of Martin Shkreli, did anyone else find the Congress hearing that he was summoned to hilarious and disturbing at the same time? It was like a massive face-off to see who could be the biggest a-hole--Shkreli or one of the congressmen.
I haven't looked at it, but now I'm very curious. I remember when the story first broke, and all the pictures of this CEO looked like he was trying to be in a rap video. He was an odd one, for sure.
It's worth watching, even if it's just for a good laugh.
Another random yet mild thought from me - I strongly dislike the color purple. I can kind of deal with periwinkle or lavendar but straight up purple hurts my eyes.
HA, when I moved into my new home, two of the bedrooms were straight up PURPLE. I was like UMMM that has got to go! I don't own one shade of purple item in my closet either. No thanks!
We just moved into a house and the room that is my office has lime green walls with a brown accent wall. I'm so excited for the painter to come tomorrow and give us an estimate.
I'm in a camp where it is hard for me to understand those with school loans (why not go to a cheaper school? Why not work more during? Live at home? Etc.), but I definitely have seen the effects of outstanding medical bills on the working class. Can you find flaws in a universal healthcare? ABSOLUTELY. Can you find flaws in a current healthcare? ABSOLUTELY. I just do not want the working class to file for bankruptcy because they get life saving treatment. That is near and dear to me - every person has their sensitive issues. Would I be willing to risk a higher tax bracket in the hopes that it would benefit others? Yes.
The flaw with healthcare reform is that it never even got to the root of the issue - why is it so expensive in the first place? Instead of going for one approach of giving everyone free healthcare, I think we should start at the beginning. I immediately think of Martin Shkreli who artificially raised the price of Daraprim. All the sudden, people who could previously afford the drug couldn't. Healthcare reform as we know it wants to give money so it can be afforded. Another example I read recently in the NYTimes talked about fraudulent insurance billing by hospitals. Some hospitals will say there was another doctor that participated in the surgery and charge thousands of dollars extra. As the patient/insurance client, we don't really know what the insurance company is getting billed, and the insurance company can't verify who was in the room during a surgery. So again, the cost is more expensive than what it should have been. Or another piece on how bad military hospitals are outside of labor and delivery. It would be financially better and better for the health of the patients to close down some of these smaller, under performing base hospitals and allow the people using them to go to other hospitals in the community. Why don't they do this? Because the states cry about all the jobs that will be lost, etc. etc. so the populations these hospitals serve have to continue to get crappy healthcare.
I want healthcare reform to prevent these things from happening in the first place. But it's easier to throw money at a problem than to actually *reform* healthcare. I agree with you that I think if someone needs to go to the doctor or get a life saving treatment, they should have that access. Unfortunately, I don't think DC knows how to use my extra $233 a month to make that happen, so again, I'd rather keep it. Show me a real plan that makes logical sense and gets at the heart of the situation, and maybe I'll reconsider. "Free Healthcare!" doesn't get me there.
I totally agree - start at the root. However, I do not see anyone proposing that - so in the meantime, we should limit healthcare to those that really need it because I insist on keeping $233 a month? That is too heavy of a burden for me to carry.
It sounds like you and I are on the same page in terms of wanting the overall problem fixed (heard a story where they charged a woman $14 for every pill paper cup they gave her when they administered meds - over $10k worth!!) - which candidate is going to be the one to do that?
I'm a Canadian born and raised, now living with my American husband in SoCal. I've had universal health care, and in many ways, it is a wonderful and necessary thing. The healthcare crisis in America actually made me not want to have babies here for a long time (basically until we got very very good insurance). We're lucky because of the insurance we have, but I realize that a lot of people aren't so lucky, and I do want universal health care.
And so we get to this: we have Obamacare, which for all intents and purposes, is a pretty good starter system. Now, the GOP for some reason thinks they can be elected and automatically disband it (they need to actually review their powers as potential POTUS, btw, because, they can't actually do this) so we'll leave them out for now, since they have a totally different idea of health care for this country. So we're left with the Dems, which now means HRC or Bernie. I am an HRC supporter, and probably always will be (and I find a lot of the criticisms levied against her to be (1) Decades of GOP smear tactics that people believe (2) A lot of "When Bill was president he did x ..." excuses for her behaviour - which may hold for Jeb as he is a Bush with mostly the same advisors as pater and brother dearest, but doesn't work for the Clintons and (3) sensationalst/sexist crap. Are they legit criticisms? Of course. But when a lot of news stories end with her being "shrill" or how she's a grandma now ... ugh. Kills it.) but I get why people like Bernie: He's all about revolution and he appeals to a left-leanign younger segment of the population that has become radicalized. And it's great for youth to be radicalized. But here's the problem: His policies don't make sense (example: dismantling Obamacare and installing a single payer health system like in Canada. Two big problems: the costs would far outweigh the current estimates, oh and yeah - all those insurance companies going bust? What happens to all those people's jobs? It is unfeasible and unwise to pull out the carpet like that) and he's a bit of a one (or 3, I guess) trick pony. He lacks policies where they matter to me as a nearly 30 year old woman who is about to give birth. He says great things like "Of course women should have control of their bodies!" but HRC, not Bernie, has thrown weight behind that sentiment, and as someone who is having a daughter, an American daughter, I don't want to leave her with lukewarm policies on women's health which is already decades behind men's health (with exception, I know, to research into breast cancer, I know.).
Basically: universal health care is great! But do it wisely. Voting for a POTUS who harps on about being "revolutionary" and has not any proof about compromise in his entire time as an establishment politician (oh, how about that burn? :P) is probably not the POTUS that would be good for any left-leaning people in a GOP-controlled house. HRC, meanwhile, has shown willingness to compromise, btw.
Also, my UO is I hate Air Conditioning (huge UO here in SoCal) - it makes my skin dry, my eyes dry and gives me shivers. I'd rather just open a window any day ...
@AmmyBelle I think that was an excellent analysis, and I really appreciate the comparison. My biggest hurdle with Hilary is my perception that she can be bought (and some of her foreign policy). I definitely think I have allowed it to color all the analysis I've read so I really need to go back taking that out of the equation, but it has been a real struggle for me. Probably because they will not release transcripts from her walstreet speaking engagements - why act like she has something to hide if she doesn't?
I do believe the smear campaign and Bill comments are ridiculously unfair.
Thanks for the perspective - something to think about!
I hate working. Maybe it's just my job but I've realized I hate working this week after having 2 weeks off.
This can't possibly be an unpopular opinion.
Yeah, I think the UO would be "I really like working."
Which I do! But that's because I'm lucky enough to have a super cool boss and a job I like, which is unfortunately much more the exception than the norm.
@AliciaD39 - Anytime and same to you! I love politics talk, though I admit, given my current FB feed I am not very kind about Bernie supporters (perhaps it's the Berniebros, maybe just the same article over and over again saying how "revolutionary" things will be - you know what revolutionary? Russia in 1917, Cuba 1950s, etc - revolution without thought as to consequences is scary)
That being said, I think Bernie is a good person and I like him. I'm just never going to be -for- him.
Added to that, I suppose, is the independent - or rather, the case of an independent splitting the vote. Say we get Bernie as the Dem nominee - he's a self proclaimed socialist and very far to the left. A lot of Dems are not behind this brand of radical. Then Bloomi runs. He's just left wing enough (socially that is) to actually sway a lot of support from the Dems. Which means splitting that vote, which means it will be less likely that the Dems with get the win.
Alternatively, what is Cruz or Trump - the two candidates people generally seem to agree on as being far right and a little insane - win and face off against Bernie, with Bloomi as an independent ... now that may be interesting, but I am just too timid to bet on a good outcome :S
Anyways, am always up for politics, so feel free to debate me anytime!
I also don't understand why anyone would vote for Sanders. He is the Democratic answer to the "old crabby white guy" that the GOP is apparently made up of.
I think there are many more aspects to the candidates than general age, first impression, race, or gender on both sides.
I agree. I am just saying how the left complains that the GOP is just old and crusty white guys. But somehow, the old and crusty white guy on the dem ticket is killing it.
Honestly, if you had told me a year ago that I'd be leaning towards voting for the old crabby white guy, I'd have laughed in your face about it. But here we are.
Aside from age and the crabbiness factor, I don't think that Bernie is exactly like the stereotypical aging politician. I mean, yeah, he's a politician, period, and there are definitely some real aspects of his platform that need serious thinking about before anyone votes for him, but he's not the crusty white guy that the left was complaining about. Those guys are the ones who were making comments about "legitimate rape" and dictating women's reproductive healthcare when they had no idea how it even works (and made it plain that they didn't care to know). And that wasn't just a one-off situation - there were lots of older white guys coming out of the woodworks saying this stuff. If it wasn't about rape/women's health, it was about race or marriage equality or something else. Bernie was a real surprise, especially when you consider that he's been talking about some of these same issues since way back when, and on most of them he's had pretty much the same stance that he does today.
I haven't decided for sure that I'm voting for him yet (like I said, there are things in his platform that need careful consideration), but I'm definitely not comfortable with any of the GOP front runners and I'm still not convinced that Hillary's the best option. I do think that I still need to do some more research on all of this before November comes.
What's that sign that people have been putting up that's been all over the Internet? "Idk but not Trump tho". Basically me right now.
I've always been kind of up in the air when it comes to presidential voting. I always vote, but if my person doesn't win, I'm always interested to see what the other candidate will do as president. I'm pretty moderate and a registered unaffiliated. However, this election, I am terrified if it comes down to Bernie Sanders vs. Donald Trump. With Sanders, my tax bracket would go up to 30% to give everyone free tuition. Nevermind my husband and I have our own student loans to pay off and that analysts already say that the taxes Bernie wants to implement will never make it happen. But hey, an 18 year old hears this and the catchy "FEEL THE BERN!" and they are all in. Nothing is ever free, kids. Someone will pay for it. He wants to tax people who make over $10 Million 52%! Not that I would ever have to face that tax burden, but philosophically, I think it's ridiculous to expect someone to pay over 50% of their income to the government. And then Donald Trump is Donald Trump. Under no circumstances could I ever vote for such a bombastic, shock value, candidate. I can't believe how much people love him.
Of the people available, I'd feel much better about a Hillary vs. Jeb face-off. They are both much closer to the center with their policies. Unfortunately, Hillary is facing not being cool enough for the dems, and Jeb faces a complete and total lack of charisma. He's like a sad lost puppy. But no one cares about policies, plans, and how politicians plan to actually implement their ideas. It's all about who is the coolest or says the best things. I feel like it gets worse and worse every election, but I wouldn't be surprised if it has to do with me also being 4 years older each election. Damn kids! Get off my lawn!
Ok I think this will be a huge UO.
If you earn $10 million then you can definitely afford to give 50% of your income to the government to pay for things like education, healthcare, military etc. If you cant live off $5 million a year something is seriously wrong with you.
Besides I think most people earning $10 million will pay for fancy accountants who will hide most of the money anyway so they don't have to pay.
Angel baby June 2013, DD born 22 April 2014, BFP 10 Sept 2015 - Due 22 May 2016
@AmmyBelle theberniebros are just trolling. And I can't imagine the craziness on facebook- I've stayed away from it the last three years.
I am curious to your thoughts on the documentary Inequality for All, if you have seen it, and if you think any of the candidates would have any impact.
Also- my UO is how people are now bashing the scale. I get that it isn't the only tool we have to measure healthiness, but for me personally, it helps keep me in check. It may not work for everyone, but mine reminds me when I need to back off the junk occasionally.
@AliciaD39 - it's on my list actually! I am sorely behind in watching things. Except the new season of The X-Files, which I make time for. (Priorities, am I right?)
@AliciaD39 - it's on my list actually! I am sorely behind in watching things. Except the new season of The X-Files, which I make time for. (Priorities, am I right?)
Seen the one with Rhys Dharby in it yet! Yay for kiwis on screen
Angel baby June 2013, DD born 22 April 2014, BFP 10 Sept 2015 - Due 22 May 2016
Another random yet mild thought from me - I strongly dislike the color purple. I can kind of deal with periwinkle or lavendar but straight up purple hurts my eyes.
I feel the same way about bright orange. It was really fun working at Home Depot back in the day!
@AliciaD39 , I though Inequality for All was outstanding. I think I need to watch it again to full absorb the ideas as I am not an economics whiz but I think it is a very thought provoking movie. I'd def. say Bernie's message is closest. Having said that, I still don't know who I support between Bernie and Hillary.
I've always been kind of up in the air when it comes to presidential voting. I always vote, but if my person doesn't win, I'm always interested to see what the other candidate will do as president. I'm pretty moderate and a registered unaffiliated. However, this election, I am terrified if it comes down to Bernie Sanders vs. Donald Trump. With Sanders, my tax bracket would go up to 30% to give everyone free tuition. Nevermind my husband and I have our own student loans to pay off and that analysts already say that the taxes Bernie wants to implement will never make it happen. But hey, an 18 year old hears this and the catchy "FEEL THE BERN!" and they are all in. Nothing is ever free, kids. Someone will pay for it. He wants to tax people who make over $10 Million 52%! Not that I would ever have to face that tax burden, but philosophically, I think it's ridiculous to expect someone to pay over 50% of their income to the government. And then Donald Trump is Donald Trump. Under no circumstances could I ever vote for such a bombastic, shock value, candidate. I can't believe how much people love him.
Of the people available, I'd feel much better about a Hillary vs. Jeb face-off. They are both much closer to the center with their policies. Unfortunately, Hillary is facing not being cool enough for the dems, and Jeb faces a complete and total lack of charisma. He's like a sad lost puppy. But no one cares about policies, plans, and how politicians plan to actually implement their ideas. It's all about who is the coolest or says the best things. I feel like it gets worse and worse every election, but I wouldn't be surprised if it has to do with me also being 4 years older each election. Damn kids! Get off my lawn!
Ok I think this will be a huge UO.
If you earn $10 million then you can definitely afford to give 50% of your income to the government to pay for things like education, healthcare, military etc. If you cant live off $5 million a year something is seriously wrong with you.
Besides I think most people earning $10 million will pay for fancy accountants who will hide most of the money anyway so they don't have to pay.
Lurking from A16, just wanted to point out that, when you're talking about marginal tax rates going up, you're not actually talking about having your entire income taxed at that rate. My husband and I are in a bracket that is taxed at 25%. That means our first $18,450 is taxed at 10%; any income we make between $18,451 and $74,900 is taxed at 15%, and any income we make above that is taxed at 25%. We don't pay 25% on everything. We might be able to offset some of the amount we owe via deductions or reducing our taxable income, but otherwise, the same is true from the highest income bracket to the lowest income bracket. When a candidate talks about raising the top income tax bracket to 52% for people who earn over $10 million, he's not talking about making those people pay 52% on their entire income. He's talking about making those people pay 52 cents on every dollar they earn above and beyond $10 million. They're still paying 10% on the first chunk, then 15% on the next chunk, then 25% on the next chunk (and so on and so forth), same as us poorer folks.
So, using the example that somebody brought up earlier about a couple making 140k, if you raise their top bracket from 25% to 30%, they'd be paying an extra 5% only on their last $65,099 (140k-74.9k) of income, not on the whole 140,000. A 2% jump isn't $233 per month, it's about $108. That's just about a 1% decrease in their monthly take home pay. A 5% jump in their top bracket tax rate (an extra $3254.95 per year) means decreasing their take home pay by a whopping 2.3%. For a couple making $100k, they'd pay an extra 1.2% per year total (5% extra on the only last $25,100 they make).
US tax brackets for married couples filing jointly as they currently stand are below. To my knowledge, nobody is currently proposing raising tax rates on the bottom two brackets, which are where the majority of Americans fall (median household income is, iirc, just over 51K).
Income from: Taxed at:
0 to $18,450
10%
$18,451 to $74,900
15%
$74,901 to $151,200
25%
151,201 to $230,450
28%
$230,451 to $411,500
33%
$411,501 to $464,850
35%
$464,851 or more
39.6%
I'm not a Bernie Sanders supporter, but I do kind of feel like it's important to understand exactly what exactly he and the other candidates are really proposing when we talk about raising or lowering taxes.
@AGK2015 , that is very helpful information. What about capital gains taxes?My understanding is that those are taxed at a lower rate than income.... If so, that just seems patently wrong to me.
@AGK2015 , that is very helpful information. What about capital gains taxes?My understanding is that those are taxed at a lower rate than income.... If so, that just seems patently wrong to me.
Not super familiar with them (because I've never had to pay them), but I'm pretty sure you're right. For long term capital gains (on investments over a certain length of time), I think the rate is 0% for the first amount, around 15% for a big chunk over that, and it tops out at 20% no matter how much you make. Encourages long term investing, which is great if you've actually got money to invest... but it also means that folks like Donald Trump and Warren Buffett, who aren't getting salaries like the rest of us are, are making out like bandits, compared to the rest of us.
The other big piece would be FICA taxes (Social Security and Medicare), which are one flat rate for everybody on the first $118,500 of income. You don't pay any SS taxes on income above $118,500 (you do still pay a little bit towards Medicare); people who make less than $118,500 pay a higher percentage of their income towards FICA taxes than those who make more.
I'm going to deviate from politics with my UO. My UO is probably not really a true UO. I'm sure many probably share my same predicament.
My UO is the vague picture (with no word) instructions on baby stuff on how to collapse it and put it back up again. Today I scored a Fisher Price Jumperoo thingy (closest thing I can find to call it online) at Once Upon A Child. I got lucky and the person was bringing it in right when I got there so I waited around front and pounced on it as soon as they put a price on it. I was driving the small truck (Ford Ranger - they are pretty small) and did not want to ride around with it in the back (I don't know how to work the straps). After I bought it I took it outside and spent about 20 minutes or more (I kid you not) trying to figure out how to collapse it. The diagram was vague and was positioned in a bad spot on the bottom of the plastic seat. It even skipped a necessary step. Please tell me that all the instructions on all baby stuff isn't that vague?
@nerdymama15For the most it is unfortunately. HOWEVER, YouTube is awesome with instructions for a lot of things. I put my pack n play, bassinet, crib, stroller, and tricycle together all thanks to YouTube. The instructions were crap.
Been married since 2009. Unicornuate Uterus (yes I menstruate glitter) Several MCs DD born 2013 (our miracle "you can't have babies" baby!)
@nerdymama15For the most it is unfortunately. HOWEVER, YouTube is awesome with instructions for a lot of things. I put my pack n play, bassinet, crib, stroller, and tricycle together all thanks to YouTube. The instructions were crap.
I LOVE YouTube. YouTube helps me cook and taught me how to loom knit.
^ YouTube helped me pick a lock when the girl I babysit locked my son in our back bedroom. True story.
But I can't tell you how many times I've put up the pnp and it's hit and miss whether it's going to take me 1 minute or 20. Those things can be so finicky!!
@js8812Do you have the same thing for Hilary or the other candidates? I'm curious how they compare since it looks like Payroll taxes are what is recommended to change significantly. I can of course google it too
Re: UO Thursday 2/11/16
Been married since 2009.
Unicornuate Uterus (yes I menstruate glitter)
Several MCs
DD born 2013 (our miracle "you can't have babies" baby!)
Also - I talked about one point in what you said. There are definitely other issues that are important outside of taxes. And yes, I would be willing to give up $233 a month of income if it came with a person who I aligned with other things about their platform. I'm not saying it is not a lot of money, and I'm grateful that I have it, but I do believe there are good things done with tax money. (i.e. John Green who said he was willing to pay taxes for schools, even though he didn't have kids, because he didn't want to live in a country of stupid people.)
I'm in a camp where it is hard for me to understand those with school loans (why not go to a cheaper school? Why not work more during? Live at home? Etc.), but I definitely have seen the effects of outstanding medical bills on the working class. Can you find flaws in a universal healthcare? ABSOLUTELY. Can you find flaws in a current healthcare? ABSOLUTELY. I just do not want the working class to file for bankruptcy because they get life saving treatment. That is near and dear to me - every person has their sensitive issues. Would I be willing to risk a higher tax bracket in the hopes that it would benefit others? Yes.
So maybe to me it is more than just an extra $233 a month.
And as far as the rabbit hole, that hole has been going further and further with every single term. If there was someone who I felt like pushed important issues and was fiscally responsible, I would definitely check into them (i.e. why I said I was interested in Bloomberg above). However, I'm not seeing said candidate so I'm dealing with current options.
I want healthcare reform to prevent these things from happening in the first place. But it's easier to throw money at a problem than to actually *reform* healthcare. I agree with you that I think if someone needs to go to the doctor or get a life saving treatment, they should have that access. Unfortunately, I don't think DC knows how to use my extra $233 a month to make that happen, so again, I'd rather keep it. Show me a real plan that makes logical sense and gets at the heart of the situation, and maybe I'll reconsider. "Free Healthcare!" doesn't get me there.
It sounds like you and I are on the same page in terms of wanting the overall problem fixed (heard a story where they charged a woman $14 for every pill paper cup they gave her when they administered meds - over $10k worth!!) - which candidate is going to be the one to do that?
But - I want to paint them purple. Hahaha!
And so we get to this: we have Obamacare, which for all intents and purposes, is a pretty good starter system. Now, the GOP for some reason thinks they can be elected and automatically disband it (they need to actually review their powers as potential POTUS, btw, because, they can't actually do this) so we'll leave them out for now, since they have a totally different idea of health care for this country. So we're left with the Dems, which now means HRC or Bernie. I am an HRC supporter, and probably always will be (and I find a lot of the criticisms levied against her to be (1) Decades of GOP smear tactics that people believe (2) A lot of "When Bill was president he did x ..." excuses for her behaviour - which may hold for Jeb as he is a Bush with mostly the same advisors as pater and brother dearest, but doesn't work for the Clintons and (3) sensationalst/sexist crap. Are they legit criticisms? Of course. But when a lot of news stories end with her being "shrill" or how she's a grandma now ... ugh. Kills it.) but I get why people like Bernie: He's all about revolution and he appeals to a left-leanign younger segment of the population that has become radicalized. And it's great for youth to be radicalized. But here's the problem: His policies don't make sense (example: dismantling Obamacare and installing a single payer health system like in Canada. Two big problems: the costs would far outweigh the current estimates, oh and yeah - all those insurance companies going bust? What happens to all those people's jobs? It is unfeasible and unwise to pull out the carpet like that) and he's a bit of a one (or 3, I guess) trick pony. He lacks policies where they matter to me as a nearly 30 year old woman who is about to give birth. He says great things like "Of course women should have control of their bodies!" but HRC, not Bernie, has thrown weight behind that sentiment, and as someone who is having a daughter, an American daughter, I don't want to leave her with lukewarm policies on women's health which is already decades behind men's health (with exception, I know, to research into breast cancer, I know.).
Basically: universal health care is great! But do it wisely. Voting for a POTUS who harps on about being "revolutionary" and has not any proof about compromise in his entire time as an establishment politician (oh, how about that burn? :P) is probably not the POTUS that would be good for any left-leaning people in a GOP-controlled house. HRC, meanwhile, has shown willingness to compromise, btw.
Also, my UO is I hate Air Conditioning (huge UO here in SoCal) - it makes my skin dry, my eyes dry and gives me shivers. I'd rather just open a window any day ...
I do believe the smear campaign and Bill comments are ridiculously unfair.
Thanks for the perspective - something to think about!
Which I do! But that's because I'm lucky enough to have a super cool boss and a job I like, which is unfortunately much more the exception than the norm.
That being said, I think Bernie is a good person and I like him. I'm just never going to be -for- him.
Added to that, I suppose, is the independent - or rather, the case of an independent splitting the vote. Say we get Bernie as the Dem nominee - he's a self proclaimed socialist and very far to the left. A lot of Dems are not behind this brand of radical. Then Bloomi runs. He's just left wing enough (socially that is) to actually sway a lot of support from the Dems. Which means splitting that vote, which means it will be less likely that the Dems with get the win.
Alternatively, what is Cruz or Trump - the two candidates people generally seem to agree on as being far right and a little insane - win and face off against Bernie, with Bloomi as an independent ... now that may be interesting, but I am just too timid to bet on a good outcome :S
Anyways, am always up for politics, so feel free to debate me anytime!
Aside from age and the crabbiness factor, I don't think that Bernie is exactly like the stereotypical aging politician. I mean, yeah, he's a politician, period, and there are definitely some real aspects of his platform that need serious thinking about before anyone votes for him, but he's not the crusty white guy that the left was complaining about. Those guys are the ones who were making comments about "legitimate rape" and dictating women's reproductive healthcare when they had no idea how it even works (and made it plain that they didn't care to know). And that wasn't just a one-off situation - there were lots of older white guys coming out of the woodworks saying this stuff. If it wasn't about rape/women's health, it was about race or marriage equality or something else. Bernie was a real surprise, especially when you consider that he's been talking about some of these same issues since way back when, and on most of them he's had pretty much the same stance that he does today.
I haven't decided for sure that I'm voting for him yet (like I said, there are things in his platform that need careful consideration), but I'm definitely not comfortable with any of the GOP front runners and I'm still not convinced that Hillary's the best option. I do think that I still need to do some more research on all of this before November comes.
What's that sign that people have been putting up that's been all over the Internet? "Idk but not Trump tho". Basically me right now.
If you earn $10 million then you can definitely afford to give 50% of your income to the government to pay for things like education, healthcare, military etc. If you cant live off $5 million a year something is seriously wrong with you.
Besides I think most people earning $10 million will pay for fancy accountants who will hide most of the money anyway so they don't have to pay.
I am curious to your thoughts on the documentary Inequality for All, if you have seen it, and if you think any of the candidates would have any impact.
Also- my UO is how people are now bashing the scale. I get that it isn't the only tool we have to measure healthiness, but for me personally, it helps keep me in check. It may not work for everyone, but mine reminds me when I need to back off the junk occasionally.
Having said that, I still don't know who I support between Bernie and Hillary.
So, using the example that somebody brought up earlier about a couple making 140k, if you raise their top bracket from 25% to 30%, they'd be paying an extra 5% only on their last $65,099 (140k-74.9k) of income, not on the whole 140,000. A 2% jump isn't $233 per month, it's about $108. That's just about a 1% decrease in their monthly take home pay. A 5% jump in their top bracket tax rate (an extra $3254.95 per year) means decreasing their take home pay by a whopping 2.3%. For a couple making $100k, they'd pay an extra 1.2% per year total (5% extra on the only last $25,100 they make).
US tax brackets for married couples filing jointly as they currently stand are below. To my knowledge, nobody is currently proposing raising tax rates on the bottom two brackets, which are where the majority of Americans fall (median household income is, iirc, just over 51K).
Income from: Taxed at:
I'm not a Bernie Sanders supporter, but I do kind of feel like it's important to understand exactly what exactly he and the other candidates are really proposing when we talk about raising or lowering taxes.
The other big piece would be FICA taxes (Social Security and Medicare), which are one flat rate for everybody on the first $118,500 of income. You don't pay any SS taxes on income above $118,500 (you do still pay a little bit towards Medicare); people who make less than $118,500 pay a higher percentage of their income towards FICA taxes than those who make more.
My UO is the vague picture (with no word) instructions on baby stuff on how to collapse it and put it back up again. Today I scored a Fisher Price Jumperoo thingy (closest thing I can find to call it online) at Once Upon A Child. I got lucky and the person was bringing it in right when I got there so I waited around front and pounced on it as soon as they put a price on it. I was driving the small truck (Ford Ranger - they are pretty small) and did not want to ride around with it in the back (I don't know how to work the straps). After I bought it I took it outside and spent about 20 minutes or more (I kid you not) trying to figure out how to collapse it. The diagram was vague and was positioned in a bad spot on the bottom of the plastic seat. It even skipped a necessary step. Please tell me that all the instructions on all baby stuff isn't that vague?
First Pregnancy
Second Pregnancy
- BFP: 09/11/2015
- EDD: 05/25/2016
Baby Born04/15/2016
PGAL
Been married since 2009.
Unicornuate Uterus (yes I menstruate glitter)
Several MCs
DD born 2013 (our miracle "you can't have babies" baby!)
First Pregnancy
Second Pregnancy
- BFP: 09/11/2015
- EDD: 05/25/2016
Baby Born04/15/2016
PGAL
But I can't tell you how many times I've put up the pnp and it's hit and miss whether it's going to take me 1 minute or 20. Those things can be so finicky!!
Also high-five to everyone. No matter the opinion or view, I'm just glad we all care enough to think and talk about it!
https://www.vox.com/2016/1/22/10814798/bernie-sanders-tax-rates
ETA Capital Gains Chart